WI: 1968 without de Gaulle - a revolution

This is a reboot of a discussion I began some years ago.

This is essentially about a French political TL I'm researching with a POD involving de Gaulle's death some time between the gaullist landslide of 1947 municipal elections and the legislative elections of 1951 which saw gaullists becoming the largest party of the assembly.

Historically, despite these successes, de Gaulle's staunch opposition to the Fourth republic and participation of RPF to it caused his party to collapse, not to return before the events of 1958.

If my first interest in such a TL was to see the possibility of May 1968 protests devolving into a revolution, I've recently wondered more about the alternate development of the Fourth republic.

I thin to start with the elections of 1951 to keep on the momentum won by RPF.
1951 box.JPG

This election was a noticeable one. The moderate parties composing the Third Force, ranging from socialists of SFIO to christian democrats of MRP and agrarians of the CNIP, had passed an electoral law, Loi des Apparentements, to favor their candidates through the way of electoral alliances and ballot fusions, and prevent either Communists or Gaullists from sweeping the National Assembly. It did work at some extent and the Third Force won a comfortable majority, but soon after the election, the Third Force died over an education bill regarding the funding of private schools, supported by the right but opposed by socialists.
The occasion came for gaullists to form a government under Jacques Soustelle, leader of RPF's delegation in Palais Bourbon, during the cabinet crisis of january 1952 but was missed because of de Gaulle's stubborn opposition.

Here, with de Gaulle gone, I imagine Soustelle could attempt to form a government with MRP and CNIP.
But I doubt he could succeed at this point. Gaullists were opposed to the CED or European Defense Community, a project which Robert Schuman, foreign minister since 1948 and important figure of MRP was a strong proponent. IOTL, MRP caused Pinay's government to fall in december 1952 because it felt he wasn't doing much on CED while his successor, Mayer, initially supported by gaullists was voted out by them as they thought he was going to open the debate on ratification.
The CED issue was also a deciding factor in the presidential election of 1953, right moderate candidate Laniel being supportive and left candidate Naegelen being opposed to it; finally, it was René Coty, neutral as he hadn't taken position on the topic who ended up elected.
The issue embarrassed every government until Pierre-Mendès France finally got the CED treaty debated by the National Assembly in 1954 where it was rejected.

Other topic on foreign agenda was the conclusion of the Indochina War and the Suez Crisis which caused in France a feeling of betrayal by the US and motivated the country to pursue a more independent course, especially in the domain of nuclear energy and weapons. Such an atmosphere led to Félix Gaillard government, accused of bowing to American pressure for a mediation following the bombing of a FLN base in Tunisia.
At the same time, it set the military in a mind of disillusion as to the abilities and legitimacy of the Fourth Republic, resulting into the 'almost coup' of 1958 and the coup attempt of 1961.

On the domestic front, another development that could boost the Gaullists ITTL is the birth of Poujadist movement who begun as a tax protest led by Pierre Poujade in 1953 and that got 52 deputies elected in 1956. I think that without de Gaulle interfering and RPF participating more to the political process and existing longer, it could coopt Poujadists and keep its ground in the 1956 elections.

As we arrive in 1968, I would see an atmosphere of civil war.
The Fifth Republic, without de Gaulle, would be born out of a coup, like in 1958 or 1961, thus setting a problem over the legitimacy of the regime and making the events of May 1968 worse.
Algeria is still French, Mitterand proclaims some provisionial government while Gaston Monnerville, president of the Senate, becoming de jure acting president (and the first of African descent in France's history).
This 'revolution' would end with Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, a liberal, elected in landslide (thanks to the Silent Majority) president after a direct election is organized.
I've chosen him because his OTL presidency was the occasion of great social and cultural reforms, set as an answer to the generational crisis that burst out in 1968, such as with abortion, voting age brought to 18 and many others.

3337083_000-par2003071027775_545x460_autocrop.jpg
index_g_monnerville.jpg
tumblr_inline_nycdbsTsop1s26uly_500.png
 
Last edited:
Interesting, but I'm not sure a 1958 coup without De Gaulle would be like the Fifth Republic. The Regime of the Colonels seemed more likely a comparison.
 
Interesting, but I'm not sure a 1958 coup without De Gaulle would be like the Fifth Republic. The Regime of the Colonels seemed more likely a comparison.
That's right, but this is not Greece.
There is credible political alternative with the RPF support for a presidential regime as defined by de Gaulle in the Bayeux speeches (1946). A coup would only be to force this transition to a rational and stable system and stop short any talk on abandoning Algeria, the time of writing a new constitution and set up new elections.
As for a figurehead, I've thought about different gaullist barons as Debré, Soustelle or Chaban-Delmas, but also Pierre de Gaulle, Charles' brother and president of Paris town council (the office of mayor wasn't restored until 1975 IOTL) after 1947 elections. Pierre de Gaulle has the name and is 'mayor' of Paris, but I doubt he would command the same charism as his brother.


So would Algeria become free at some point?
There is to define free. Before the independence of Algeria, one tenth of the population was of European descent which mirror South Africa, but that's won't go so far as segregation. I don't know precisely what kind of relations had the different ethnic communities, but I guess it would be more relevant to speak of passive discrimination than segregation like in the United States.
Historically, the French won the war in Algeria, Challe having effectively pacified the country but politically, it was a defeat. Here, with Algeria being kept, there would still be to win the peace (a logical continuation of the hearts and minds strategy displayed by the French army during this war). Part of what made the bed for the FLN was the poverty of Algeria and the lack of proper investment and development by France. We may think France would use an important part of the revenue from Algeria's oil to develop local infrastructures and employment (at least under Giscard d'Estaing).
 
Something I didn't thought of immediately is that Algeria staying French would have another indirect impact of metropolitan French society.

Historically, the independence of Algeria caused an exodus including the Pieds-noirs and Harkis.
The emigration of a number of Pieds-noirs into Corsica caused an upsurge of Corsican nationalism and rise of local terrorism.
Some of the Harkis, Algerian auxiliaries of the French army, settled in France, and I wonder how the development of North African communities in Metropolitan France would be affected, either slowing or boosting immigration.
 
Top